#but it’s like no there’s so much nuance there

[mostlysignssomeportents]

An end to the climate emergency is in our grasp

On June 20, I'm keynoting the LOCUS AWARDS in OAKLAND.

The problem with good news in the real world is that it's messy. Neat happy endings are for novels, not the real world, and that goes double for the climate emergency. But even though good climate news is complicated and nuanced, that doesn't mean it shouldn't buoy our spirits and fill our hearts with hope.

The big climate news this past week is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's clarion call about surging CO2 levels – the highest ever – amid a year that is on track to have the largest and most extreme series of weather events in human history:

https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/during-year-of-extremes-carbon-dioxide-levels-surge-faster-than-ever

This is genuinely alarming and you – like me – have probably experienced it as a kind of increase in your background radiation of climate anxiety. Perhaps you – like me – even experienced some acute, sit-bolt-upright-in-bed-at-2AM anxiety as a result. That's totally justifiable. This is very real, very bad news.

And yet…

The news isn't all bad, and even this terrible dispatch from the NOAA is best understood in context, which Bill McKibben provides in his latest newsletter post, "What You Want is an S Curve":

https://billmckibben.substack.com/p/what-you-want-is-an-s-curve

Financier and their critics should all be familiar with Stein's Law: "anything that can't go on forever will eventually stop." This is true outside of finance as well. One of the reasons that we're seeing such autophagic panic from the tech companies is that their period of explosive growth is at an end.

For years, they told themselves that they were experiencing double-digit annual growth because they were "creating value" and "innovating" but the majority of their growth was just a side-effect of the growth of the internet itself. When hundreds of millions of people get online every year, the dominant online services will, on average, gain hundreds of millions of new users.

But when you run out of people who don't have internet access, your growth is going to slow. How can it not? Indeed, at that point, the only ways to grow are to either poach users from your rivals (through the very expensive tactics of massive advertising and sales-support investments, on top of discounts and freebies as switching enticements), or to squeeze your own users for more.

That's why the number of laptops sold in America slowed down. It's why the number of cellphones sold in America slowed down. It's why the number of "smart home" gizmos slowed down.

Even the steepest hockey-stick-shaped exponential growth curve eventually levels off and becomes an S-curve, because anything that can't go on forever will eventually stop.

One way or another, the world's carbon emissions will eventually level off. Even if we drive ourselves to (or over) the brink of extinction and set up the conditions for wildfires that release all the carbon stored in all the Earth's plants, the amount of carbon we pump into the atmosphere has to level off.

Rendering the Earth incapable of sustaining human civilization (or life) is the ultimate carbon reduction method – but it's not my first choice.

That's where McKibben's latest newsletter comes in. He cites a new report from the Rocky Mountain Institute, which shows a major reversal in our energy sources, a shift that will see our energy primarily provided by renewables, with minimal dependence on fossil fuels:

https://rmi.org/insight/the-cleantech-revolution/

The RMI team says that in this year or next, we'll have hit peak demand for fossil fuels (a fact that is consistent with NOAA's finding that we're emitting more CO2 than ever). The reason for this is that so much renewable energy is about to come online, and it is so goddamned cheap, that we are about to undergo a huge shift in our energy consumption patterns.

This past decade saw a 12-fold increase in solar capacity, a 180-fold increase in battery storage, and a 100-fold increase in EV sales. China is leading the world in a cleantech transition, with the EU in close second. Cleantech is surging in places where energy demand is also still growing, like India and Vietnam. Fossil fuel use has already peaked in Thailand, South Africa and every country in Latin America.

We're on the verge of solar constituting an absolute majority of all the world's energy generation. This year, batteries will overtake pumped hydro for energy storage. Every cleantech metric is growing the way that fossil fuels did in previous centuries: investment, patents, energy density, wind turbine rotor size. The price of solar is on track to halve (again) in the next decade.

In short, cleantech growth looks like the growth of other technologies that were once rarities and then became ubiquitous overnight: TV, cellphones, etc. That growth isn't merely being driven by the urgency of the climate emergency: it's primarily a factor of how fucking great cleantech is:

https://rmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/the_incredible_inefficiency_of_fossils.pdf

Fossil fuels suck. It's not just that they wreck the planet, or that their extraction is both politically and environmentally disastrous. They just aren't a good way to make energy. About a third of fossil fuel energy is wasted in production and transportation. A third! Another third is wasted turning fossil fuels into energy. Two thirds! The net energy efficiency of fossil fuels is about 37%.

Compare that with cleantech. EVs convert electricity to movement with 80-90% efficiency. Heat pumps are 300% efficient (the main fuel for your heat pump is the heat in the atmosphere, not the electricity it draws).

Cleantech is just getting started – it's still in the hockey-stick phase. That means those efficiency numbers are only going up. Rivian just figured out how to remove 1.6 miles of copper wire from each vehicle. That's just one rev – there's doubtless lots of room for more redesigns that will further dematerialize EVs:

https://insideevs.com/news/722265/rivian-r1s-r1t-wiring/

As McKibben points out, there's been a lot of justifiable concern that electrification will eventually use up all our available copper, but copper demand has remained flat even as electrification has soared – and this is why. We keep figuring out new ways to electrify with fewer materials:

https://www.chemanalyst.com/NewsAndDeals/NewsDetails/copper-wire-price-remains-stable-amidst-surplus-supply-and-expanding-mining-25416#:~:text=Global%20Copper%20wire%20Price%20Remains%20Stable%20Amidst%20Surplus%20Supply%20and%20Expanding%20Mining%20Activities

This is exactly what happened with previous iterations of tech. The material, energy and labor budgets of cars, buildings, furniture, etc all fell precipitously every time there was a new technique for manufacturing them. Renewables are at the start of that process. There's going to be a lot of this dematerialization in cleantech. Calculating the bill of materials for a planetary energy transition isn't a matter of multiplying the materials in current tech by the amount of new systems we'll need – as we create those new systems, we will constantly whittle down their materials.

What's more, global instability drives cleantech uptake. The Russian invasion of Ukraine caused a surge in European renewables. The story that energy prices are rising due to renewables (or carbon taxes) is a total lie. Fossil fuels are getting much more expensive, thanks to both war and rampant, illegal price-fixing:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/an-oil-price-fixing-conspiracy-caused

If not for renewables, the incredible energy shocks of the recent years would be far more severe.

The renewables story is very good and it should bring you some comfort. But as McKibben points out, it's still not enough – yet. The examples of rapid tech uptake had big business on their side. America's living rooms filled with TV because America's largest businesses pulled out all the stops to convince everyone to buy a TV. By contrast, today's largest businesses – banks, oil companies and car companies – are working around the clock to stop cleantech adoption.

We're on track to double our use of renewables before the decade is over. But to hold to the (already recklessly high) targets from the Paris Accord, we need to triple our renewables usage. As McKibben says, the difference between doubling and tripling our renewables by 2030 is the difference between "survivable trouble" and something much scarier.

The US is experiencing a welcome surge in utility scale solar, but residential solar is stalling out as governments withdraw subsidies or even begin policies that actively restrict rooftop solar:

https://twitter.com/curious_founder/status/1798049929082097842?s=51

McKibben says the difference between where we are now and bringing back the push for home solar generation is the difference between "fast" and "faster" – that is the difference between tripling renewables by 2030 (survivable) and doubling (eek).

Capitalism stans who argue that we can survive the climate emergency with market tools will point to the good news on renewable and say that the market is the only way to transition to renewables. It's true that market forces are partly responsible for this fast transition. But the market is also the barrier to a faster (and thus survivable) transition. The oil companies, the banks who are so invested in fossil fuels, the petrostates who distort the world's politics – they're why we're not much farther along.

The climate emergency was never going to be neatly solved. We weren't going to get a neat novelistic climax that saw our problems sorted out in a single fell swoop. We're going to be fighting all the way to net zero, and after that, we'll still have decades of climate debt to pay down: fires, floods, habitat loss, zoonotic plagues, refugee crises.

But we should take our wins. Even if we're far from where we need to be on renewables, we're much farther along on renewables than we had any business hoping for, just a few years ago. The momentum is on our side. It's up to us to use that momentum and grow it. We're riding the hockey-stick, they're on that long, flat, static top of the S-curve. Their curve is leveling off and will start falling, ours will grow like crazy for the rest of our lives.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/12/s-curve/#anything-that-cant-go-on-forever-eventually-stops

[puppyeared]

i feel like im not making any sense but does anyone else feel like there are stories that let u run with them and ones that spell everything out for you

[homunculus-argument]

Hi! Regarding your post that starts like this “Sometimes whether or not something is abusive behaviour depends on context, but not infinitely nuanced and complicated context, just one simple question: does it go both ways?”

How do you fit accommodations or varying needs into this? Ex. An autistic person easily overwhelmed by sound so you can’t yell around them who themselves have bad control over their own voice volume.

This is not critique btw, I’d just like an elaboration.

It's not about the act itself as much as the effect it has. Let's say that you're autistic, loud noises cause you pain, but you also make loud noises. Living with neurotypical people who don't have either of those issues, it's not a matter of "if I am not allowed to make loud noises, then you are not allowed to make loud noises", but "I am not allowed to recreationally do things that cause you pain, and you aren't allowed to recreationally do things that cause me pain." It's about reciprocal respect of everyone's needs.

Let's take a non-autistic example: There's a household of three people, out of whom one works nights, and needs to sleep during the day. The other two are awake during the day, and have no hesitation to make as much noise as they want, while the one who works night shift tries to keep dead quiet at night when they sleep. As far as the two day-active people are concerned, the rules are the same for everyone: Nobody can make noise during the night, everyone can make noise during the day.

But to the night shift person, it's an unequal arrangement, as they have the obligation to keep quiet when they're awake, and nobody has the obligation to keep quiet when they're trying to sleep. So the rule is "I am allowed to disturb your sleep, but you aren't allowed to disturb my sleep." Unequal rules.

And if everyone in your household is bothered by loud noises, and makes loud noises involuntarily, I'd suggest trying to find some other living arrangement. That can't be tolerable.

[callixton]

i think the thing to understand abt martha jones is that even after she leaves she is five seconds away from dropping everything and traveling with the doctor at any given time. bc that itch to blow everything up and damn her personal duty to hell in search of a higher call never leaves her. but martha is smart. and rational. and has spent a long fucking time needing to keep herself safe. (bc he comes when she calls but never before.) and so she has gotten very good at keeping herself on the right side of those five seconds. but i do think if ten was a different person (if he could acknowledge how much he needed her instead of just how much he liked her) (if he didn’t feel this righteous martyrdom when it comes to being left alone) (if he cared enough about her to beg. if he cared enough about himself.) i think that her answer no would come crumbling down pretty quickly is all.

[neptune-scythe]

thinking about queerplatonic buddie and how it's literally just their canon relationship they just don't use that word for it

like they're out here being "best friends" but they're literally co-parenting, Buck went to Eddie when he was worn out from people checking up on him and babysitting him all day, Eddie told Buck about the whole Shannon doppelganger situation without him even having to pry at all

they're always there for each other, they just show up at eachother's houses (like Eddie full on showing up at Buck's appartment and letting himself and Christopher in while Buck was sleeping why tf aren't we talking about this more), they act like a married couple without actually being romantic, they undeniably love each other

and yeah Buck is only Christopher's legal guardian if Eddie dies, but he's already his second dad idc

the three of them are a family, Eddie and Buck have passed beyond friendship to something much deeper, and all that undeniable love and care and devotion that makes so many people ship them romantically is already there. They don't need to be married or dating each other to be a family, to love each other or be each other's home

no shade to the romantic buddie shippers /gen, but i personally love their relationship as it is without romance

they're best friends but also a family but not romantic but also something much more than just friends and it's a perfect example of a queerplatonic relationship and the nuances and depth of love and family and I've honestly never seen that in media ever and it's so special to me

[avelera]

I’m dying for your thoughts on what is going on in Dubai with the triangulation of Armand and Daniel in Dubai because nothing in 2.05 explain ms what they(beddeath vampires) could want him to tell them as referenced earlier in the season or warrant all the Rashid pageantry. Especially not with how Armand looks at Daniel like he just got home from the wars.

Your takes are exquisite and I’d love to hear them.

Ok, I THINK you're asking what the hell is going on with Daniel and Armand and Louis and the longing looks Armand keeps shooting Daniel and I might be missing some nuance to your question but that is the question I'm gonna answer because I can't stop thinking about it.

Ok. Ok, ok, SO!! The biggest question I think we're facing as of 2.05 is did the Devil's Minion chapter of Queen of the Damned ever happen?

For the uninitiated (LOTS of BOOK SPOILERS but like the books have been out for decades, sorry): Louis/Armand is like... not a thing. At least, it's not one of the big love affairs of the series compared to Louis/Lestat. I mean they've had a situationship but they're definitely not a long devoted love affair going right up to the beginning of the events of Vampire Lestat/Queen of the Damned, which is where the show seems to take place. They traveled together for a bit after the events of Interview with the Vampire but then parted ways because What Happened In Paris changed Louis irrevocably.

The big love of Armand's life in the books is Daniel.

And we learn this in the chapter of Queen of the Damned called the Devil's Minion.

Because Armand stumbles upon "The Interviewer" and falls in love and they have this fucked up whirlwind torrid romance where Daniel teaches Armand about the modern world and basically "how to be fascinating" and Daniel begs over and over to be made into a vampire.

Lots of stuff happens between them but short, TRAGIC version is that Armand does make Daniel into a vampire and it breaks Daniel's mind. He's not a cool powerful vampire once he's turned, he's basically a vegetable, he loses his mind and becomes a hollow husk of himself. (Ironically, insane-new-vampire!Daniel is left in the care of Marius of all people lol)

SO, from the book reader perspective, I shot upright on my couch when I saw old Daniel. Because Old Daniel means we're in... some flavor of happy AU? We're in an AU where Armand did the "responsible" thing and didn't give Daniel the Dark Gift, so Daniel got to grow old and actually be a person instead of being the Devil's Minion where Armand became his whole personality and then he lost his mind.

Thing is, since S1, I've been assuming, like others I think, that we're in an AU where the Devil's Minion didn't happen at all. That Daniel did the interview, he and Louis parted ways, and now he's back to finish it. It seemed neat, clear, if a little confusing for book fans because Daniel/Armand is one of THE great love affairs and it seems like it just got skipped entirely, which kind of makes sense since no other film version has really delved into it, right?

WRONG. OK, so with the longing looks that begin RIGHT when Armand finally reveals himself, the whole mic drop moment of "Armand, the love of my life" while Armand stares at Daniel, almost seeming to plead with his eyes "GET ME AWAY FROM HIM" and looking at Daniel with such longing, going into SEASON 2 where we learn that ok, the 1970s beat was WAY more complicated than it seems, Louis' memory is very faulty, Armand has actively tampered with both of them and we DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH....?

So my current theory is: the Devil's Minion DID happen.

Armand and Daniel had their love affair, but instead of turning Daniel, which by the way he had to be talked into doing because of Daniel's suicide attempt basically, Armand set him free. But CLEARLY he continued to stalk and pine after Daniel, if he was there at Daniel's fucking engagement reading his girlfriend's mind enough to tell Daniel what she was really thinking then. Armand was definitely still OBSESSIVELY IN LOVE. And, IMO, has been the whole time.

Now, what does this mean going forward? What do I think is going on?

Armand wants out of his relationship with Louis but he's chronically, pathologically, incapable of breaking up with anyone. He used Lestat to break up the Children of Darkness, he used Louis to break up the Theatre des Vampires, and now he's using Daniel to end this fucked up marriage he and Louis are in.

Armand is doing this first by consenting to renew the interview, Louis gets a walk down memory lane, remembers how much he loves Lestat. Not to solidify their bond with how good things are now, but to break it up with nostalgia.

Armand is also going to reveal things he's hidden from Louis, I think. Like the fact Armand killed Claudia. I think right now they're both operating under the excuse that Santiago and the coven did it in defiance of Armand but that is simply not true, Armand ordered her death to get Louis all to himself. But (book canon) her death broke Louis so basically Armand destroyed what he wanted in Louis in the gaining of him.

Armand also misses Daniel. He's doing the classic passive lover thing, using the next lover to get rid of the current one. That's why he picked Daniel specifically as the vehicle of his liberation. Boy wants to get white knighted in the most fucked up way possible. Evidence: every single painfully longing, puppy dog look he shoots Daniel's way and how those looks only get more intense the more Louis waxes poetic about how great the Loumand relationship is.

Armand appears as Rashid in order to establish for plausible deniability for Louis that he DIDN'T have a relationship with Daniel OR, if Louis knows about it, that he really did do as promised and wiped Daniel's mind. Look, Daniel doesn't even remember him! When he's standing right there! Pretending to be Rashid! He definitely didn't summon his former lover here to break up Louis and him, obviously this is JUST about Louis' desire to do the interview haha, definitely not trying to bring his old ex to break up his current relationship the guy doesn't even remember who he is.

In conclusion: Armand still wants to fuck that boy old man. And he wants to get rid of Louis by making Louis break up with him because that's how Armand rolls. And that's why this whole ridiculous pantomime is happening, because Armand will never, ever be the active party in the breakup because the boy is way, way too fucked up by his supremely fucked up life up to this point to ever be the initiator. Instead he will always, always manipulate those around him to do what he wants.

[balladofthe101st]

what i really like about perconte's character is how honest he is with his feelings. being angry after sobel unfairly revoked his weekend pass. not backing down when martin shouts at him because he knows he's being singled out unfairly. not liking the spaghetti served at camp because it's an insult to his italian heritage. being vocal about how easy is always exposed to danger, either being on the vanguard or tail. complaining when people steal his stuff or dirty his clothes. tired of hearing how eager the replacements are to go to war. hating how he hasn't been home for two years. just shows how he's only human caught in the middle of war and how in spite of the war, he lets himself feel and not suppress or ignore how or what he's feeling

[thatsmybook]

My current Young Royals thoughts: Wille telling Boris that he felt lonely in his role as Prince, having to keep everything private so that people didn't take advantage. Even when Erik was alive. He was lonely, but he was okay with it because he knew Erik was there.

When he meets Simon, he experiences what it's like to not feel lonely for the first time. Simon just gets him. They're actually really good friends. Simon shares himself: his friends, his activities, where he grew up, his home, his mum. Even Simon's mum and friends treat Wille as a regular person. Simon allows Wille in, to be seen by him. He is not guarded or fake around Wille.

Simon is honest with him and real and sees him, not his role. He sees him as a person, not an empty symbol. He treats him with the respect of an equal. The relief Wille must feel to be able to finally be and discover himself through this companionship.

He describes the loss of that to Boris. He tells Boris he made a friend who made him experience that new feeling. The loss of that relationship has been so hard for having tasted what it's like to be seen.

Simon is so vulnerable and open with Wille because Wille saw him as a person first. Wille recognised him and wanted to get to know him. Wille saw his heart in his singing, then his mind in his class discussions, and decided that this was a person who he wanted to walk alongside. Wille's deep stare is part of his always noticing nuances about Simon. He reads his moods. He's always aware of where he is.

In season three, he is too distracted by the increasing pressure brought on by Farima's demands on him as well as the impending doom of his mother's illness, to notice that Simon is falling apart. In this season, Wille is not noticing when Simon is showing distress on his face. Where before he spent so much time noticing, now his attention is elsewhere.

Simon is starting to feel the loneliness that Wille feels, as part of the royal machinery. The poisoned royal cake has started to take its effect.

[blitzwhore]

I just saw Blitzø get called Stolas stockholm victim I can't with this fandom anymore😭

😂 As outrageously incorrect and stupid as that take is, I'm going to go on a tangent here. I hope you don't mind.

I think every fandom has annoying people with awfully terrible takes in it. People with zero media literacy. People who hatewatch. People who think they're entitled to the exact show they would've wanted, which has nothing to do with the actual, existing show.

This is especially true for queer media, and especially true for queer cartoons. (Hi, yes. I was active in the Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Voltron, and She-Ra fandoms when those shows were airing, respectively. I've seen some stuff). Some people just can't handle queer cartoons, period. If the queer characters/ships are soft and wholesome, they're infantilising and boring, and if they're complex and nuanced and actually have conflict, they're abusive and problematic. You'll hear the same recycled arguments over and over again. Like, the shit some people are saying about Blitz and Stolas after The Full Moon? Is literally almost word-for-word what they said about Catra and Adora post-season 3 of She-Ra (and even at the end of the show).

Here's the thing, though! Those people and their bad takes are not what I want to think about what I think about a fandom. Those aren't the people I want to call the fans. They don't deserve that title. Not when so many other people are out there dedicating their time to making gifs and art and meta posts, and writing fic, and commenting/reblogging to show support, and sliding into people's DMs to scream and squee together about a thing they love.

At the end of the day, "fandom" is just a lot of people each doing their own thing. Which people you engage with and allow to stay within your line of sight will determine your fandom experience. Fandom can be a huge, convoluted, online space full of people who are constantly arguing with one another and whose takes make you unfathomably angry... Or it can be you and your 5 friends and mutuals who scream gleefully at one another in 2-note posts. You can't control what others post online, but you can control your engagement with it.

How? Well, here's what I personally do to avoid getting upset by people's stupid opinions online:

Filter 'critical' and 'anti' tags (eg. #anti stolitz #anti vivziepop #Helluva Boss critical #HB critical #vivziepop critical). Many people actually do tag their critical posts because they know it's the respectful thing to do!

If I come across a post that has one or more of those tags, obviously, I don't click through to see it under any circumstances.

If I stumble across a stranger's untagged post with hate/criticism that upsets me: I stop reading and BLOCK. Immediately. I don't look back. I don't finish reading. I don't engage. I just block block block. I <3 the block button, seriously.

If I feel my mind reeling from a bad take I just came across: I take a step back, close my phone, breathe, remember life is beautiful sometimes. Go back and watch an episode I really like. Clean my living space a little. Vent about it to a friend (but only if I really need to, because if not, I'd rather not dwell on it).

If I'm starting to feel the need to reply to someone's bad take (directly or via my own post), I instead make the decision to channel that energy into making fandom posts out of love. (I don't do this just with fandom. If I see something transphobic online, I usually react by reblogging a bunch of trans art or trans positivity posts on my main, for example). I like to think of it as putting some positivity out into the world to compensate for the negativity I just saw. So, for example, if I see someone shitting on my blorbo, I may make a silly post just saying how much I love blorbo. Or I'll make (or draft) a post about how interesting I find some of blorbo's actions. Or reblog another person's positive/interesting post about blorbo.

And finally, I stay the hell away from Twitter. Or at least, if I go on Twitter, I try my best to avoid any tweet that has text in it instead of just art. Even the people who have good opinions spend too much time arguing with the people who have bad opinions on there. I don't want to see people's bad takes! No, not even while reading founded and perfectly articulated criticism of those bad takes! So I just limit my time on Twitter. And again, if someone is putting bad takes on my TL (even if it is to counter them), I unfollow and block as needed.

All this to say, yes, it really fucking sucks to read the opinions of people who don't understand and who hate the characters and ships and worlds you love. Gosh it's the worst. But you can curate your fandom experience. You can focus on the things you can control. You have the power to decide if your fandom experience is draining or fun!

And because I don't know how to finish this, here, have a Stolitz kiss to heal you:

We will keep winning and there's nothing the haters can do about it. 😌

[kurishiri]

I love this art but it be low key a lil scary… is that just me?

like hear me out here.

“go commit a crime” “ok” vibes

ok so maybe I’m totally delusional, that’s also fair. But like,

they chose to make them look into a mirror, something made clear from the bottom; would this suggest Alfons has some sort of “upper hand” or advantage, as he is the one with the mirror curse

for the most part, the background is blurred out, so only Elbie and Alfons are 100% clear in the reflection — this could be symbolism of how much pure trust Elbie puts in Alfons

like to Elbie, Alfons is his world

another way you can tell Elbie heavily trusts Alfons (maybe too much) is look at how close their faces are: Alfons is leaning in from above, and Elbie basically leaning back in from below

now this may be because they are “master and attendant” but Elbie is not fully clothed, while Alfons is. The lack of clothes can symbolize vulnerability, and on the other hand, being fully clothed can represent being closed off

basically, it seems that Elbie may be overly dependent (overly trusting) on Alfons. They said in the relationship chart that they were “childhood friends” and “master and attendant” but, it’s probably deeper and more nuanced and/or twisted than that. And that nuance, I think, is captured in this official art

the pinned blue butterflies in the background are beautiful, but symbolically could represent feeling “trapped” or, at the very least, not free

there’s the juxtaposition of Elbie’s kind of sad?? expression and the bright, sunny background, and Alfons is probably plotting something. I don’t know what, but he likely is, like just look at that smile-

maybe this art is just so beautiful it’s scary /lh

if anyone’s got more insight, I’d love to hear 👀

“go commit a cwime uwu”

“okie”

[keymintt]

every day people call my coyotes wolves

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

WIBTA for writing a story where someone from 1944 is the main character, with all that entails?

I (M, white) had an idea for a story as of late. I have not written it yet but I plan to.

Basically, the plot (very summarized) is that a French soldier, J, falls through a weak point in time and space. This weak point connects a WWII battlefield in 1944 and a random meadow in Georgia in 2024, outside of Atlanta. He gets found by the other main character, M, and the story is about him teaching J about what life is like 80 yrs later.

In the story, J is a white cis man, and M is a Black/Korean trans man. Throughout the story, J unlearns biases that were put upon him by ignorance, and that includes racist, homophobic, and transphobic beliefs, among others. The point of this was to show that even a person brought directly from a very uneducated time even WITHOUT all the social movements of the 20th century can make the decision to change their ways. He and M even end up together by the end of it, as J realizes that so much of his self loathing came from internalized homophobia.

Anyway, that's the gist of it. Now for the actual conflict.

I have a friend (F, also white) whom I described the story to to get her thoughts on it. She said she was concerned that I was making my transgender character of color get with a racist, transphobic guy by the end. I tried to explain that it was BECAUSE of M that J gets put on the path to change, and that the man at the end is not the same man from the beginning. It got more heated as I tried harder and harder to explain the nuances of the story. I eventually asked her what ending SHE'D prefer, and she said she "would like it better if M beat the shit out of him, or if J got sent back to his own time and got shot."

I replied that that was a terrible idea, that there was nothing wrong with showing a character growing, and that she sounded super twitterbrained. She called me a nazi apologist and blocked me, and now she's lying to mutual friends and saying that I said that MLK deserved it (????????????). Fortunately none of them believe her after talking to me, so...

I know she's acting insane about the other shit, but it's starting to weigh on me. Should I change J's character so he's from sometime else? Or just scrap the story altogether? WIBTA for continuing it as planned?

[nalyra-dreaming]

I feel so much for Armand which I didn’t expect. Obviously, Fake Rashid wasn’t a fully fleshed out character. But Armand is so complex and interesting. And of course, he’s done terrible things (like all of them, whatever)… It’s just… 70s Armand is essentially living with an addict, right? That’s what Louis is. And as someone who’s lived with an addict… I don’t know. You (generic you) can’t know what that’s like and what it does to you and how desperately lonely and angry it can make you feel if you haven’t lived it… I guess I’ll always have some empathy for Armand just because of that. And sympathy for his rage. I’ve felt it, too.

I don’t know the point of this ask… just. I didn’t expect to feel so much for Armand. Man, what a show. What characters. I haven’t stopped thinking about it all since s2 started.

They managed to give it sooooo much nuance. All of it. But especially Armand, too.

Because Armand does terrible things. Will do terrible things still. Has done terrible things in Dubai... And yet. And yet.

You feel for him, because he has had a shit life. More than any other vampire, probably. And it has shaped him.

And the agony, when he asked Louis if he had crawled an inch forward in forgiveness after Paris... brutal.

I absolutely adore this show.

They do not cuddle any of the characters. They give them depths, flaws, talents... and nuance.

There is no black and white storytelling here. No, it's all morally gray, and just as them we have to navigate the tumultuous depths of... there not being the final right or wrong (well, in many cases).

Because... Evil is a point of view.

[pastadoughie]

can non intersex trans people please stop putting intersexism and bio essentialism shit on my dash like??? all the time???

whenever i try to talk about nuance in transphobia and point out blatant intersexism i am simultaneously made out to be a stupid naive little bitch woman who doesnt know what shes talking about and an evil misogynistic man when i am neither. its textbook erasure and dehumanization no matter how polite and understanding i try to be. and i am talking SPECIFICALLY about trans people. often because perisex trans people are WORSE at recognizing and correcting their intersexism because they view themselves as "above" bioessentialism for their transness,,, its honestly tiring

the way sexism presents is the fundamental idea that :

women by default have LESS agency

and men by default have MORE agency

i feel like i shouldnt have to tell you that this is dehumanization of BOTH, but ill do it anyway. someones agency in a given situation depends on a VARIETY of different factors, like class / race / disability / location / & the political views of the community they are in

moreover "man" and "woman" are not actually defined terms. for example, being a victim of misogyny has ZERO correlation to whether or not you are a woman, in BOTH ways that people categorize womanhood. either as a biological trait (or a collection of traits) or as an identity label

if you get catcalled on the street that is not because you ARE a woman but because you are PERCEIVED AS ONE by the catcaller. someones profiling of you as a woman being accurate DOESNT MEAN IT ISNT PROFILING. literally NOBODY has a chromosome detector 3000.

so many forms of gender based discrimination perpetrated in the queer community COMPLETELY skip over these nuances in discrimination and often get EXTREMELY ANGRY when you try to point them out! this is often because people have this inherent belief that they are somehow transcendent and that they DO magically have a chromosome detector 3000, that their profiling is magically always correct, and this belief is tied to their ego.

moreover people mischaracterize sexism as just "hating women" and NOT actually as "sorting people arbitrarily into boxes for their perceived genders", if you are a TERF you are EXACTLY THE SAME AMOUNT OF SEXIST as someone who believes women shouldnt be allowed to vote. they still hold the fundamental idea of men by default having more agency.

i think TERFism is a wonderful example of how people can be sexist against men and the harm that it causes, because that is the ideological core of radfem politics.

people perceived as "male" when placed in a community full of people seen as "female" are automatically seen as predatory for their perceived privilege (regardless of if those privileges actually apply in that setting at all! look at transfemmes! they get literally zero benefits from their perceived manhood, and yet are still seen as predatory because of it ). when i speak about "misandry" however loaded the word is- this is what i am referring to, the assumptions and discrimination that comes from being arbitrarily placed in a gender category seen as having universally more agency.

because agency isnt innate or biological this sorting into categories is ALWAYS sexism even if they benefit the person!!

this is why i think phrases like "TME" are inherently harmful, because weather or not someone is seen as a "man" or a "woman" is completely arbitrary and can differ wildly depending on not only the person doing the profiling, but also the context of the situation. trans-misogyny, being seen as a "man" trying to "invade" a "womans space" is not exclusive to transfemmes nor even universally applies TO transfemmes.

moreover its why i hate the word "trans-androphobia" because its not even descriptive of the perception of being a "girl" trying to be a "man"

i think in general the shorthand the trans community uses lacks so much fucking nuance and is baked in with intersexism and bio essentialism  pretty much as a rule.. i think it's infinitely more clear to use words corresponding to what exactly the profiling of whoever is being bigoted is far more helpful and clear, but in order for something like that to be clear it needs to actually be used with nuance and keeping in mind the fact that discrimination is based on PROFILING and not off of any kind of objective reality. In which words that just mean "the type of discrimination transmen go through" is ambiguous and unhelpful on every level.

if you wanna be less intersexist YOU NEED TO LET GO of the idea that certain people universally have more/less agency AS WELL AS THE IDEA that you are universally exempt from or included in any kind of gender based discrimination

[transtundras-fr]

One thing I’ve noticed from the community is that people act like criticizing staff/the art direction is ALWAYS bad and “if you hate it so much make your own!” in flavor. We need to learn nuance.

I don’t agree with dogpiling on staff or making up false accusations or blowing stuff up that doesn’t need to be, but guess what, staff are human! They make mistakes, it’s ok! And this is a COMMUNITY based game, so I would argue the community’s feedback matters even more than, say, an offline single player game for example. Most of the people who are criticizing staff/art (myself included) do so Because we love flight rising. If we truly hated it so much, we wouldn’t play anymore.

The idea that staff is untouchable hinders a community more than it helps. We should be promoting helpful criticism while ALSO dissuading overreaching.

[genericpuff]

Hey, so I really love Lore Rekindled, and the art is one of my favorite parts! The style, the coloring, the background, all of it is just so… smooth! I don’t really know how to describe it. Recently, I’ve been trying to replicate it, and I was hoping you would give me a few pointers. What brushes do you use for line art? How do you decided what to line, and what to leave blank? What about coloring brushes? Do you use smudge brushes? Whats, like, the step by step process? You don’t have to answer if you don’t want to! But any tips or answers would be great!

Ah thanks so much!!!

Here are the brushes! They're .abr brushes, so they should work in Photoshop, Clip Studio and Procreate :) (they don't work in Krita or other software that utilizes PNG brushes though, sorry ; ; )

There's also a tutorial included with that file that breaks down my process layer by layer! That said, there are a couple things that have changed in my process since doing that tutorial:

I mostly use the Hard Square Pastel brush now for all of that 'crispy' lighting that often happens along the edges of characters' shoulders and heads, such as seen here:

I now do an extra step of applying a 'blur' layer, where I essentially merge all the layers into a new layer on top of everything, set it to Overlay, and then Gaussian Blur by about 60%. This is how I get that 'dreamy' look that's been present in a lot of the more recent episodes!

It's subtle, but really effective in making the glow effects and deeper colors really pop!

As for the more nuanced stuff like lineart, it's kinda just something I do by feel! Sometimes I'll shade something in and realize the lineart doesn't need to be there, so then I'll go in and erase, other times I have to be a bit more excessive with it esp if two similar colors are up against each other. I'm actually trying to use less lineart going forward to get more of that authentic LO look but it's hard, I'm very used to doing lineart-heavy drawings so it's forcing me to draw in a way that I'm not used to! 😆 I usually always start with flat colors first though, meaning I start by 'shaping' out the character poses and then lining them in afterwards!

You can see an example of this process in my END OF PERSEPHONE time lapse here:

I also usually stream work sessions of Rekindled over on my Twitch, but I'm currently on hiatus from streaming due to technical difficulties (OBS just... decided it was gonna stop working, sigh). Go give it a follow anyways tho so you can be notified when I start streaming again! I'm thinking in the meantime until I can get my Twitch going again I might start doing some screen sharing sessions in Discord. So keep your eyes peeled for that if you ever wanna catch me working! I'm always happy to talk about and demystify the process <3